Histological Assessment of Tangentially Excised Burn Eschars
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The burn eschar serves as a medium for bacterial growth and a source of local and systemic infection. To prevent or minimize these complications, it is important to debride the eschar as early as possible. OBJECTIVE: To identify the presence of viable skin within the excisions by examining tangentially excised burn eschars. METHODS: A total of 146 samples of burned human tissue were removed during 54 routine sharp tangential excision procedures (using dermatomes). The samples were histologically examined to identify the relative thickness of the dead, intermediate and viable layers. RESULTS: The mean (± SD) thickness of the excised samples was 1.7±1.1 mm. The sacrificed viable tissue (mean thickness 0.7±0.8 mm) occupied 41.2% of the entire thickness of the excision. In 32 biopsies (21.8%; 95% CI 16.0 to 29.3), the excision did not reach viable skin. Only eight biopsies (5.4%; 95% CI 2.8 to 10.1) contained all of the necrotic tissue without removing viable tissue. CONCLUSIONS: The thickness of a single tangentially excised layer of eschar is not much greater than the actual thickness of the entire skin and often contains viable tissue. Because surgical debridement is insufficiently selective, more selective means of debriding burn eschars should be explored.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it